Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/395/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 395 of 2008
=========================================================
DHARMENDRABHAI
H SOLANKI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
NIKHIL S KARIEL for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MRS.FALGUNI PATEL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1,
SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR
KANDRAP H DHOLKIA for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
Date
: 25/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is preferred by
the petitioner-original complainant with a prayer to quash and set
and aside the impugned order dated 17.1.2008 passed by the learned
Sessions Court, Jamnagar in Criminal Appeal No.2 of 2008 by which the
following operative order came to be passed:–
?S
Implementation, Execution and operation of the Judgment order dated
20.12.2007 passed by the Ld.9th Add. C.J.& J.M.F.C,
Jamnagar in the Cri. Case No.2779/06 is hereby stayed and placed
under suspension till next date, Subject to Production of certified
copy of the order regarding the stay of sentence passed by the
concerned Court in the matter.
Yadi
of this order be sent to the concerned Court accordingly.??
2. Learned
advocate Mr.Nikhil S.Kariel appearing for the applicant submitted
that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Dilip S.
Dhanukar V. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, reported in 2007(6) SCC
p.528, it is obligatory on the part of the Appellate Court to
direct,at least, to deposit part of the compensation as awarded by
the trial court. It is submitted that further hearing of the appeal
is fixed by the Sessions Court.
3. In
case when the original complainant point out to the Appellate Court
about the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the above decision of
Dilip S. Dhanukar V. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, reported in 2007(6)
SCC p.528 concerned Court shall consider the same and pass
appropriate order in accordance with law.
4. With
the aforesaid direction and order, this application stands disposed
of. Direct service permitted.
(Anant
S. Dave, J.)
sudhir
Top